Herzan/Table Stable "Active" Isolation table.

[spiritofmusic]

I'm close to getting an audition for an active shelf in a few weeks. I'm stoking up sufficient advance skepticism (right hemisphere-left hemisphere disagreement) that if active really impresses I will be totally amazed.
Why isn't there any discussion on the possibilities of active under the biggest vibration fiends of all - the loudspeakers?

 

[MylesBAstor]

I'm close to getting an audition for an active shelf in a few weeks. I'm stoking up sufficient advance skepticism (right hemisphere-left hemisphere disagreement) that if active really impresses I will be totally amazed.
Why isn't there any discussion on the possibilities of active under the biggest vibration fiends of all - the loudspeakers?

Perhaps one issue is that the speakers are designed with an optimal distance between the floor and woofer? Given the height of these platform, you may start wreaking havoc with you bass response as a result?

 

[beaur]

Vibration Sources

I'm close to getting an audition for an active shelf in a few weeks. I'm stoking up sufficient advance skepticism (right hemisphere-left hemisphere disagreement) that if active really impresses I will be totally amazed.
Why isn't there any discussion on the possibilities of active under the biggest vibration fiends of all - the loudspeakers?

Speakers create vibrations. These tables (both active and passive) attempt to damp vibrations from external sources as quickly as possible to minimize the affect of any vibrations on the equipment placed on the table. Would be interesting to see what an active table would try to do with one of these super engineered enclosures. Could be a way to test the damping ability of some cabinets

My guess is that any vibration table would affect different types of speakers very differently. First order guess would be electrostats be affected the most, super engineered enclosures ie WIlson, Magico the least.

 

[audioarcher]

I'm close to getting an audition for an active shelf in a few weeks. I'm stoking up sufficient advance skepticism (right hemisphere-left hemisphere disagreement) that if active really impresses I will be totally amazed.
Why isn't there any discussion on the possibilities of active under the biggest vibration fiends of all - the loudspeakers?

I predict that active isolation under speakers would be very bad. The active isolation would try to cancel out what the drivers are doing. The speaker cabinets ideally need to stay still.

I made some speaker platforms for my speakers that allowed me to use bearings between 2 plates of anodized aluminum. This was similar to using Symposium Roller Blocks under my speakers. I had cups for the bearings machined into the aluminum plates and then had them anodized so they would be hard enough to handle the weight. The result was the sound overall was less focused and the bass in particular was muddier. This is just passive. I'm guessing active would end up cancelling out some frequencies altogether. It would depend on how high up in frequency the active platform is effective.

 

[PeterA]

Why isn't there any discussion on the possibilities of active under the biggest vibration fiends of all - the loudspeakers?

Spirit, Have you posed this question to the various manufacturers with whom you are discussing these isolation devices?

 

[spiritofmusic]

Will do, I'll ask about isolation of spkrs when I'm having a home demo of an active shelf under my tt. Academic in my system, two shelves max (tt and cdp?) is likely to be my max outlay. This is the first time I'm going into a major demo feeling the need to be convinced more than most on the benefit of an upgrade - my critical faculties are ok w/ spending $12k on a new component, and I have, with dramatic results; or a TOTAL system upgrade eg ALL stands/or ALL cables/or ALL power/or ALL acoustics concerns. But ONE upgrade to ONE component ONLY for this price, well I wish it good fortune ('fortune' being the relevant word!). My jaw hitting the floor may change my mind. Will report from middle of next wk.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Big day approaches. Will be auditioning an active shelf under my tt tmrw. This will be sited on the floor, close to a spkr, so a fairly stern test re floor borne noise and feedback from spkrs. Really happy with what my passsive Symposium Isis is doing, and since I'm in the hunt for SETs as well, this shelf will really have to do the business to get my attention. But I look fwd to being amazed.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Big day approaches. Will be auditioning an active shelf under my tt tmrw. This will be sited on the floor, close to a spkr, so a fairly stern test re floor borne noise and feedback from spkrs. Really happy with what my passsive Symposium Isis is doing, and since I'm in the hunt for SETs as well, this shelf will really have to do the business to get my attention. But I look fwd to being amazed.

which one is it?

does it have automatic leveling?

 

[spiritofmusic]

The Halcyonics i4. Yep, I do believe it has levelling. If not, oops! Going to give it quite a torture test, Queen 'Two', Japanese vinyl. There's just so much going on in this totally underrated album, but detail can be buried under a wall of bass. My Trans Fi Salvation rim drive tt/Terminator air bearing arm/Straingauge cart do an amazing job of unravelling the strands that make it up, so any improvement from the i4 will be most welcome.
Btw Mike, I plumped for the Straingauge. It needs perfect setup esp re azimuth, but boy, is it worth it! I've never been so beguiled by a cart since my Lyra Parnassus, and is the best all-round performer I've had in my system.

 

[PeterA]

The Halcyonics i4. Yep, I do believe it has levelling. If not, oops! Going to give it quite a torture test, Queen 'Two', Japanese vinyl. There's just so much going on in this totally underrated album, but detail can be buried under a wall of bass. My Trans Fi Salvation rim drive tt/Terminator air bearing arm/Straingauge cart do an amazing job of unravelling the strands that make it up, so any improvement from the i4 will be most welcome.
Btw Mike, I plumped for the Straingauge. It needs perfect setup esp re azimuth, but boy, is it worth it! I've never been so beguiled by a cart since my Lyra Parnassus, and is the best all-round performer I've had in my system.

Spirit, Do you know how the Halcyonics i4 differs from Mike and Christian's Herzan?

 

[rockitman]

Spirit, Do you know how the Halcyonics i4 differs from Mike and Christian's Herzan?

it looks similar in spec to the TS series distributed by Herzan.
http://www.accurion.com/i4-Series/

 

[spiritofmusic]

Not v much, if at all. Both 6 axes of active isolation, piezo sensors, sub 1 Hz performance. Just the most convenient company to get a demo with, and Chris from Halcyonics has provided much info via email. The demo will also help him test the shelf 'in the field' so to speak, since audio applications are still a new venture for these companies. He's adamant they can't work properly on top of passive isolation, so the floor is where things are going. He will take measurements with my tt as is on my Isis, and then via the i4.
I see there is some chat re using active, then in series with passive, followed by the component ie tuning isolation. Personally, if we're going to ignore the fundamental physics of what active does, then what's the point? If active really isolates to the nth degree, I refuse to believe passive on top can add anything to the party.
Of all the tweaks we audiophiles like to spend our cash on, surely this is the least prone to further mods helping, I mean how much more sub 1 Hz can you go?

 

[rockitman]

If active really isolates to the nth degree, I refuse to believe passive on top can add anything to the party.
Of all the tweaks we audiophiles like to spend our cash on, surely this is the least prone to further mods helping, I mean how much more sub 1 Hz can you go?

That is how a feel. The table should make good contact with the TT's feet so it can get in tune so to speak with the active feedback loop coming from the table itself and the external environment: from the ground and acoustic noise.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I see there is some chat re using active, then in series with passive, followed by the component ie tuning isolation. Personally, if we're going to ignore the fundamental physics of what active does, then what's the point?

keep your mind and ears open. if it sounds better it is better.

If active really isolates to the nth degree, I refuse to believe passive on top can add anything to the party.
Of all the tweaks we audiophiles like to spend our cash on, surely this is the least prone to further mods helping, I mean how much more sub 1 Hz can you go?

again; forget about your belief. just listen.

you cannot generalize about what will make your gear sound the best.

i agree with Chris at Accurion that passive under the i4 will not be desirable. but what is used on top of the i4 is an open question. the answer, of course, is whatever might sound the best.

 

[microstrip]

(...) Personally, if we're going to ignore the fundamental physics of what active does, then what's the point? If active really isolates to the nth degree, I refuse to believe passive on top can add anything to the party. (...)

Passives have resonances and they can affect the normal functioning of an active device. However if the band of frequencies covered by both devices does not overlap you can still have some improvements using a passive over an active.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Sure Mike, this hobby is all about the objective-subjective balance. However my mind cannot tune out of the deep skepticism that a device which is already bullet proof re vibration control can be 'tuned' further. And all with an (un)healthy dose of hyperbole. Part of my issue is that I've never had life changing experience from tweaks except the move to balanced power, and that one can really be v. easily be explained by physics. Later today I find whether this most uber tweak of them all makes me eat my words.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Sure Mike, this hobby is all about the objective-subjective balance. However my mind cannot tune out of the deep skepticism that a device which is already bullet proof re vibration control can be 'tuned' further. And all with an (un)healthy dose of hyperbole. Part of my issue is that I've never had life changing experience from tweaks except the move to balanced power, and that one can really be v. easily be explained by physics. Later today I find whether this most uber tweak of them all makes me eat my words.

I am not invested in your result one way or another, or have any need to convince you of anything. i'm very much appreciative that you have made the commitment to try active isolation, and add to our knowledge base on what possibilities we all have. I know that I have been genuinely surprised by what I've heard when trying passive isolation on top of my active shelf. I have not yet tried a passive interface on top of the active with my turntable.

i'm looking forward to hearing about what you discover.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Microstrip, the whole point of sub 1 Hz active isolation in 6 axes is that it's going to cover by a wide margin all the frequencies dealt with by passive, and more. So overlap will be total. What won't be covered won't be worth considering. And won't have any practical audible bearing in audio situations.
Of all the areas I've contributed to in audio, this is the one which really makes me consider whether an area of upgrades is an OCD too far. I'm not criticising any of you pro active shelf guys in the search for the Holy Grail of isolation, but to talk of 'tuning' or 'enhancing' beyond active is IMHO looking too deeply for something.
And these changes are never subtle, always whole areas of magnitude. Time for me to shut up, I'm not going to have anything to eat before the demo unless I have to face a whole plateful of humble words afterwards !

 

[spiritofmusic]

So, Chris from the UK office of Halcyonics brought over an i4, and we did some a-b'ing of tt and cdp on passive Symposium, then on i4 sitting directly on the floor. Chris brought along analysis equipment and measured in 3 axes, on passive then active, so 6 measurements in all. I've given him permission to post graphs here. The first thing to say was that he was generally impressed by what my passive Symposium was doing. Early data showed the i4 to perform better esp in lower frequencies, but it wasn't a night and day difference. So active ahead of passive by a small but measurable margin technically. The early conclusion to draw is that my passive is really performing well.
Initial listening tests were a bit unimpressive, with a real lack of focus, until I realised that moving the whole rig onto the floor had knocked VTF of cart out of whack. On adjusting this, sound snapped into place. Now there were differences to be heard - a de-cluttering of the soundstage, more bass definition, but at the slight expense of heft and warmth. However this had the effect of allowing higher frequencies to shine more, and music seemed more harmonically complete.
What was interesting/confusing was that the effects of this was different in results depending on what song was being listened to. Ie a homogenous quality was not being imposed on the music - I've heard other upgrades that sound good until that sonic fingerprint colours every note played, and then it bugs you. But disarming in that changes were a little unpredictable song to song. So lack of uniform character imposed good in my opinion.
This bass definition/lack of heft dilemma is something I've experienced before, esp with amp a-b's and it can make decisions difficult. My guess is that the de-cluttering of bass lines is removing a layer of unneccesary warmth and that more truth is being revealed. But i can't be certain.
Cdp a-b was interesting - I don't have a killer cd to make absolute comparisons, but again refining the bass seemed to work up thru the frequencies in the disc we listened to.
Now it's gone, going back to passive only, has reintroduced this warmth, but music sounds a little less focussed and ragged at the top end.
So my conclusion is that the i4 introduces a level of calm in the music, with more tonal shading esp at the top end, at the expense of some bass bloom. As a result I would veer twds the i4, but not with 100% confidence.
Chris is generally skeptical that anything other than source components with deliberately sensitive moving parts like tts and cdps will benefit as much, and feels using passive footers btwn the i4 and feet of a tt or cdp can do anything but muddy the water. caveat emptor on this one.
My expt with SETs in the next few wks will tell me whether component changes or active isolation is where my money is going. But the i4 certainly performed above my expectations, and i think is a reasonable last line of upgrade if the front end is performing well.

 

[PeterA]

So, Chris from the UK office of Halcyonics brought over an i4, and we did some a-b'ing of tt and cdp on passive Symposium, then on i4 sitting directly on the floor. Chris brought along analysis equipment and measured in 3 axes, on passive then active, so 6 measurements in all. I've given him permission to post graphs here. The first thing to say was that he was generally impressed by what my passive Symposium was doing. Early data showed the i4 to perform better esp in lower frequencies, but it wasn't a night and day difference. So active ahead of passive by a small but measurable margin technically. The early conclusion to draw is that my passive is really performing well.
Initial listening tests were a bit unimpressive, with a real lack of focus, until I realised that moving the whole rig onto the floor had knocked VTF of cart out of whack. On adjusting this, sound snapped into place. Now there were differences to be heard - a de-cluttering of the soundstage, more bass definition, but at the slight expense of heft and warmth. However this had the effect of allowing higher frequencies to shine more, and music seemed more harmonically complete.
What was interesting/confusing was that the effects of this was different in results depending on what song was being listened to. Ie a homogenous quality was not being imposed on the music - I've heard other upgrades that sound good until that sonic fingerprint colours every note played, and then it bugs you. But disarming in that changes were a little unpredictable song to song. So lack of uniform character imposed good in my opinion.
This bass definition/lack of heft dilemma is something I've experienced before, esp with amp a-b's and it can make decisions difficult. My guess is that the de-cluttering of bass lines is removing a layer of unneccesary warmth and that more truth is being revealed. But i can't be certain.
Cdp a-b was interesting - I don't have a killer cd to make absolute comparisons, but again refining the bass seemed to work up thru the frequencies in the disc we listened to.
Now it's gone, going back to passive only, has reintroduced this warmth, but music sounds a little less focussed and ragged at the top end.
So my conclusion is that the i4 introduces a level of calm in the music, with more tonal shading esp at the top end, at the expense of some bass bloom. As a result I would veer twds the i4, but not with 100% confidence.
Chris is generally skeptical that anything other than source components with deliberately sensitive moving parts like tts and cdps will benefit as much, and feels using passive footers btwn the i4 and feet of a tt or cdp can do anything but muddy the water. caveat emptor on this one.
My expt with SETs in the next few wks will tell me whether component changes or active isolation is where my money is going. But the i4 certainly performed above my expectations, and i think is a reasonable last line of upgrade if the front end is performing well.

Spirit, Thank you for taking the time to do this and for sharing your observations with us. Did you happen to listen to the tt on the floor without activating the i4? I'm curious about feedback issues being so close to the speaker drivers. It would be incredible if there were big issues that the i4 then eliminated. I also wonder if you listened much to your new analog rig on a different rack than the Symposium for some kind of baseline impression. It sounds like your tt benefits from isolation, both passive and active. This can be very specific to various tt designs. Were you able to defeat the active isolation and listen to it in passive mode versus active mode the way Mike did? That would also be interesting to know.

I have found, like I think Mike has, that once a system is at a pretty high level, small improvements can be very significant towards more musical enjoyment.
Any cleaning up of the bass region usually effects the higher frequencies, to the good. The fact that this is heard to greater or lesser degrees on different recordings implies to me that the i4 cleaned up the sound and allowed you to hear more of the recording and less artifact or distortion. I generally don't like "bloom" if it is overlaid on all recordings. I happen to think hearing more of what is on the recording is a step in the right direction, though others may disagree because it makes poor recordings more difficult to enjoy.

Regarding isolation of amps and other electronics, with respect to Chris, I really don't think one can know unless he tries it and hears it firsthand. Perhaps any improvement is overshadowed by cost, or, as in my case, the improvement was definitely worth the cost.

I think your observations are pretty consistent with Christian's and Mike's, though perhaps your expression of them is slightly less enthusiastic. The addition of this isolation does represent a larger percentage of your overall front end cost and you may therefore value it slightly differently than Christian and Mike do. But at least you now know and can join that small group who have actually auditioned active isolation in their systems.